[DCRB-L] RE: Names of publishers

Deborah J. Leslie dcrb-l@lib.byu.edu
Thu, 7 Nov 2002 15:22:07 -0500


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2869B.58300F6D
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Oh no, Richard, I'm not rolling my eyes in the least. I made that =
statement about addresses, and then swallowed my inclination to give my =
preferences. I am emboldened by your arguments, though, and will tip my =
hand a bit here. I would like to see the rules give encouragement for =
recording addresses, drop the provision that allows only the first =
publisher's name to be included while omitting subsequent ones, and stop =
the silent omission of t.p. dedication and privilege statements. And of =
course there's the silent roman to Arabic date "adjustment" to be =
scrutinized.=20
=20
Since this revision is going to be guided with a firm and (I think) =
thorough statement of explicit general principles, all of these =
proposals for change (or retention) will need to be made with reference =
to them. The general principles document is in preparation, but I would =
like to encourage everyone to read IFLA's _Functional Requirements for =
Bibliographic Records_. It's technical and not rare-material oriented, =
but I think we will be able profitably to use the concepts and =
relationships of entities and user tasks to get a firmer grip on why we =
do what we do. All 144 pages can be found at:  =
http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr.pdf
=20
=20
Of course, one thing to keep in mind is that the clamor of the ARL =
[Association of Research Libraries] library directors for more =
streamlined and easier-to-follow rules can't be ignored. It doesn't need =
to be an either-or, at least in this early stage of thinking. If we're =
thoughtful and careful about this, we can navigate between the rocks and =
the whirlpool. =20
=20
___________________________=20
Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S.=20
Head of Cataloging=20
Folger Shakespeare Library=20
201 East Capitol St., S.E.=20
Washington, D.C. 20003=20
202.675-0369 (p)=20
202.675-0328 (f)=20
djleslie@folger.edu=20
www.folger.edu=20

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Noble [mailto:Richard_Noble@brown.edu]
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 1:57 PM
To: dcrb-l@lib.byu.edu
Subject: Re: [DCRB-L] RE: Names of publishers


Deborah's accustomed to my somewhat non-orthodox thinking, so she'll =
just roll her eyes at the following screed:

In the course of a recent non-library cataloguing project, I rejoiced =
several times that the Bodleian cataloguers had elected to transcribe =
imprints in full, including addresses--and there they were in the =
"WorldCat". Addresses change over time, and can provide invaluable =
evidence for dating undated materials. As records that include them =
accumulate in a database, we find ourselves with a historical resource =
that Plomer couldn't even have dreamed of. The same applies in the case =
of transcribing all names in a conger, rather than the supremely =
frustrating "[and 5 others]". It also applies to the wording of =
imprints, in itself a matter of considerable interest; the more we =
accumulate, the more we know, and the time to do the accumulating is =
when we have the items in hand. We are at that moment in a privileged =
position to contribute importantly to historical bibliography. Frankly, =
as a bibliographically inclined cataloguer, I've never understood how =
imprints differ from titles enough to justify the omission of this =
information. I find it intellectually incoherent.

The whole purpose of DCRM is to address the very different approach that =
we take to the marks on the page as historical artifact and historical =
evidence. It is different enough to have encountered resistance when the =
rules were first being devised--at a time when we were still mostly =
producing card sets, before it was clear how much more powerful and =
flexible our new forms of data storage and management could be. The =
resulting compromises are mostly unfortunate. I am much more interested =
in the spirit of DCRM than I am in the spirit of AACR, which properly =
serves different purposes in a different context. My hope for the BSC =
has always been that it could represent and advance the interests of =
bibliographical scholarship, to the extent that the catalogue--in the =
widest sense--is itself a scholarly bibliographical resource. We can do =
so by at least maximizing a certain permissiveness in the treatment of =
"other" information.

(Peter Blayney has recently remarked rather savagely on the omission of =
privilege statements in imprints--it is not a trivial matter. Another =
scholar, John Buchtel, recently lamented, on exlibris, the omission of =
dedicatees. One might also mention sermon texts, which are supremely =
relevant title information. I've also rejoiced when cataloguers include =
all the honorifics, degrees, positions, and encomia attached to authors' =
names in statements of responsibility: the bibliographic database can be =
one of our most comprehensive resources for authority work, after all, =
and that purpose is not well served by the cataloguer mania for knowing =
just what information to suppress.)=20

Of course, anyone who followed the recent autocat thread on the death of =
MARC and especially the introduction of databases like XOBIS will =
suspect that this is merely a death rattle.



RICHARD NOBLE : RARE BOOKS CATALOGER : JOHN HAY LIBRARY : BROWN =
UNIVERSITY
PROVIDENCE, RI 02912 : 401-863-1187/FAX 863-2093 : =
RICHARD_NOBLE@BROWN.EDU=20


------_=_NextPart_001_01C2869B.58300F6D
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">


<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2719.2200" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D000335019-07112002><FONT face=3DGeorgia =
color=3D#000080>Oh no,=20
Richard, I'm not rolling my eyes in the least. I made that statement =
about=20
addresses, and then swallowed my inclination to give my preferences. I =
am=20
emboldened by your arguments, though, and will&nbsp;tip my hand a bit =
here. I=20
would like to see the rules give encouragement for recording addresses, =
drop the=20
provision that allows only the first publisher's name to be included =
while=20
omitting subsequent ones, and stop the silent omission of t.p. =
dedication and=20
privilege statements. And of course there's the silent roman to Arabic =
date=20
"adjustment" to be scrutinized. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D000335019-07112002><FONT face=3DGeorgia=20
color=3D#000080></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D000335019-07112002><FONT face=3DGeorgia =
color=3D#000080>Since this=20
revision is going to be guided with a firm and (I think) thorough =
statement of=20
explicit general principles, all of these proposals for change (or =
retention)=20
will need to be made with reference to them. The general principles =
document is=20
in preparation, but I would like to encourage everyone to read=20
IFLA's&nbsp;_Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records_. It's =
technical=20
and not&nbsp;rare-material oriented, but I think we will be able =
profitably=20
to&nbsp;use the concepts and relationships of entities and&nbsp;user =
tasks to=20
get a firmer grip on why we do what we do. All 144 pages can be found =
at:&nbsp;=20
<A=20
href=3D"http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr.pdf">http://www.ifla.org/VI=
I/s13/frbr/frbr.pdf</A></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D000335019-07112002><FONT face=3DGeorgia=20
color=3D#000080></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D000335019-07112002><FONT face=3DGeorgia=20
color=3D#000080></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D000335019-07112002><FONT face=3DGeorgia =
color=3D#000080>Of course,=20
one thing to keep in mind is that the&nbsp;clamor of the ARL =
[Association of=20
Research Libraries]&nbsp;library directors&nbsp;for more streamlined and =

easier-to-follow rules can't be ignored. It doesn't need to be an =
either-or, at=20
least in this early stage of thinking. If we're thoughtful and careful =
about=20
this, we can navigate between the rocks and the whirlpool.&nbsp;=20
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D000335019-07112002><FONT face=3DGeorgia=20
color=3D#000080></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D000335019-07112002>
<P><FONT face=3D"Baskerville Win95BT" color=3D#000000=20
size=3D2>___________________________</FONT> <BR><FONT =
face=3D"Baskerville Win95BT"=20
color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. =
</FONT><BR><FONT=20
face=3D"Calisto MT" color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Head of Cataloging</FONT> =
<BR><FONT=20
face=3D"Calisto MT" color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Folger Shakespeare =
Library</FONT>=20
<BR><FONT face=3D"Calisto MT" color=3D#000000 size=3D2>201 East Capitol =
St.,=20
S.E.</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3D"Calisto MT" color=3D#000000 =
size=3D2>Washington, D.C.=20
20003</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3D"Calisto MT" color=3D#000000 =
size=3D2>202.675-0369=20
(p)</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3D"Calisto MT" color=3D#000000 =
size=3D2>202.675-0328=20
(f)</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3D"Calisto MT" color=3D#000000=20
size=3D2>djleslie@folger.edu</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3D"Calisto MT" =
color=3D#000000=20
size=3D2>www.folger.edu</FONT> </P></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Richard Noble=20
  [mailto:Richard_Noble@brown.edu]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, November =
07, 2002=20
  1:57 PM<BR><B>To:</B> dcrb-l@lib.byu.edu<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: =
[DCRB-L] RE:=20
  Names of publishers<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><FONT size=3D3>Deborah's =
accustomed to=20
  my somewhat non-orthodox thinking, so she'll just roll her eyes at the =

  following screed:<BR><BR>In the course of a recent non-library =
cataloguing=20
  project, I rejoiced several times that the Bodleian cataloguers had =
elected to=20
  transcribe imprints in full, including addresses--and there they were =
in the=20
  "WorldCat". Addresses change over time, and can provide invaluable =
evidence=20
  for dating undated materials. As records that include them accumulate =
in a=20
  database, we find ourselves with a historical resource that Plomer =
couldn't=20
  even have dreamed of. The same applies in the case of transcribing all =
names=20
  in a conger, rather than the supremely frustrating "[and 5 others]". =
It also=20
  applies to the wording of imprints, in itself a matter of considerable =

  interest; the more we accumulate, the more we know, and the time to do =
the=20
  accumulating is when we have the items in hand. We are at that moment =
in a=20
  privileged position to contribute importantly to historical =
bibliography.=20
  Frankly, as a bibliographically inclined cataloguer, I've never =
understood how=20
  imprints differ from titles enough to justify the omission of this=20
  information. I find it intellectually incoherent.<BR><BR>The whole =
purpose of=20
  DCRM is to address the very different approach that we take to the =
marks on=20
  the page as historical artifact and historical evidence. It is =
different=20
  enough to have encountered resistance when the rules were first being=20
  devised--at a time when we were still mostly producing card sets, =
before it=20
  was clear how much more powerful and flexible our new forms of data =
storage=20
  and management could be. The resulting compromises are mostly =
unfortunate. I=20
  am much more interested in the spirit of DCRM than I am in the spirit =
of AACR,=20
  which properly serves different purposes in a different context. My =
hope for=20
  the BSC has always been that it could represent <I>and advance</I> the =

  interests of bibliographical scholarship, to the extent that the =
catalogue--in=20
  the widest sense--is itself a scholarly bibliographical resource. We =
can do so=20
  by at least maximizing a certain permissiveness in the treatment of =
"other"=20
  information.<BR><BR>(Peter Blayney has recently remarked rather =
savagely on=20
  the omission of privilege statements in imprints--it is not a trivial =
matter.=20
  Another scholar, John Buchtel, recently lamented, on exlibris, the =
omission of=20
  dedicatees. One might also mention sermon texts, which are supremely =
relevant=20
  title information. I've also rejoiced when cataloguers include all the =

  honorifics, degrees, positions, and encomia attached to authors' names =
in=20
  statements of responsibility: the bibliographic database can be one of =
our=20
  most comprehensive resources for authority work, after all, and that =
purpose=20
  is not well served by the cataloguer mania for knowing just what =
information=20
  to suppress.) <BR><BR>Of course, anyone who followed the recent =
autocat thread=20
  on the death of MARC and especially the introduction of databases like =
XOBIS=20
  will suspect that this is merely a death rattle.<BR><BR>
  <P>RICHARD NOBLE : RARE BOOKS CATALOGER : JOHN HAY LIBRARY : BROWN=20
  UNIVERSITY<BR>PROVIDENCE, RI 02912 : 401-863-1187/FAX 863-2093 :=20
  RICHARD_NOBLE@BROWN.EDU</FONT> </P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2869B.58300F6D--